Apache Camel vs. Google Cloud Functions

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Camel
Score 6.4 out of 10
N/A
Apache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A
Google Cloud Functions
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Functions enables users to run code in the cloud with no servers or containers to manage. Cloud Functions is a scalable, pay-as-you-go functions as a service (FaaS) product to help build and connect event driven services with simple, single purpose code.N/A
Pricing
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Best Alternatives
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Boomi
Boomi
Score 8.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.0 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
7.9
(11 ratings)
6.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Message brokering across different systems, with transactionality and the ability to have fine tuned control over what happens using Java (or other languages), instead of a heavy, proprietary languages. One situation that it doesn't fit very well (as far as I have experienced) is when your workflow requires significant data mapping. While possible when using Java tooling, some other visual data mapping tools in other integration frameworks are easier to work with.
Read full review
Google
Google Cloud Platform Cloud functions are an excellent way to start a serverless journey in GCP, however, using Cloud Run may be the better solution. For users not acquainted with Docker & Linux, I would definitely recommend Google Cloud Functions, however, for more experienced users, Cloud Run may be better suited.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Camel has an easy learning curve. It is fairly well documented and there are about 5-6 books on Camel.
  • There is a large user group and blogs devoted to all things Camel and the developers of Camel provide quick answers and have also been very quick to patch Camel, when bugs are reported.
  • Camel integrates well with well known frameworks like Spring, and other middleware products like Apache Karaf and Servicemix.
  • There are over 150 components for the Camel framework that help integrate with diverse software platforms.
  • Camel is also good for creating microservices.
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Cons
Apache
  • didn't work well when our developers tried to transform heavy data sets
  • Apache Camel's whole logic is based on java so team needs to have a great skill set in java
  • if there are a handful of workflows then Apache Camel's full potential can't be realized
Read full review
Google
  • Needing a zip file is problematic (when wanting to automate deployment for example).
  • Requires another solution to execute automatically (ex. cloud scheduler).
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
Overall Google Cloud Functions is losing a lot of benefits to other GCP services, making it less attractive to users. A simple example would be the need to zip application files and push them to Google Storage which makes it a bit complicated to automate via a CI/CD pipeline. Another "similar" solution would be using Cloud Run although the need for a docker image is there, with the recent evolutions to Cloud Run (ability to downscale to 0) it makes a lot more interesting.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
Documentation is provided and clear for this service. Although GCP support is included in the current contract we didn't get to use it since the process is pretty straightforward.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
If you are looking for a Java-based open source low cost equivalent to webMethods or Azure Logic Apps, Apache Camel is an excellent choice as it is mature and widely deployed, and included in many vendored Java application servers too such as Redhat JBoss EAP. Apache Camel is lacking on the GUI tooling side compared to commercial products such as webMethods or Azure Logic Apps.
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Very fast time to market in that so many components are available to use immediately.
  • Error handling mechanisms and patterns of practice are robust and easy to use which in turn has made our application more robust from the start, so fewer bugs.
  • However, testing and debugging routes is more challenging than working is standard Java so that takes more time (less time than writing the components from scratch).
  • Most people don't know Camel coming in and many junior developers find it overwhelming and are not enthusiastic to learn it. So finding people that want to develop/maintain it is a challenge.
Read full review
Google
  • Using it for FinOps, we cut the bill in 2 for certain services (out of production).
Read full review
ScreenShots